Proposed legislation would penalize the Milwaukee Public Schools if the district cancels plans to place police officers inside school buildings. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

Republican lawmakers are proposing a law that would financially penalize the Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) and the city of Milwaukee if they stop complying with a state law that requires police officers in schools. 

The bill, coauthored by Rep. Bob Donovan (R-Greenfield) and Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), comes after months of noncompliance with state law by the school district. Wisconsin Act 12, which provided a boost in funding to local governments, included requirements that Milwaukee Public Schools place 25 school resource officers — sworn police officers assigned to schools. 

The law took effect in 2023, and officers were supposed to be in MPS schools by Jan. 1, 2024, but the district missed the deadline. On Tuesday, the city and the school district voted to approve an agreement to install the officers in response to a lawsuit. 

Donovan said during an Assembly Criminal Justice and Public Safety hearing Wednesday that it’s “unconscionable” the district took so long to follow through on the requirement.

“The biggest district, the one in my estimation that could benefit the most, has, along with the city, dragged their feet for 400 days. It’s absurd and the safety of our kids is at jeopardy,” Donovan said.

Citing a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel report found MPS averaged 3,700 police calls each year over 11 years, Donovan said the calls were “pulling officers from street patrols to respond.” He added that “SROs trained specifically for school incidents can handle many of these situations quickly, leaving officers to stay in our communities.” 

The school resource officer requirement was controversial when Act 12 was passed.  Officers had not been stationed inside Milwaukee schools since 2016, and the district ended its contract with the Milwaukee Police Department in 2020 in response to student and community opposition to the practice. At Wednesday’s hearing, Wanggaard blamed the district’s contract cancellation on  a “fit of anti-police bias.” 

Many advocates opposed to police officers in schools have pointed to potential negative impacts. 

A Brookings Institution report found  that the presence of school resource officers has led to increases in use of suspension, expulsion, police referral and arrest, especially among Black students and students with disabilities.

The agreement that the Milwaukee Common Council and Milwaukee School Board both voted to approve Tuesday was in response to a lawsuit against the district. 

In October 2023  the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL) sued MPS and the city of Milwaukee on behalf of Charlene Abughrin, a parent in the district, arguing the district’s noncompliance presented a “substantial risk to her and her child’s safety.” 

Last month a judge ordered the district and city to comply with the state law and instructed  the district and the city to split the cost for the officers evenly.

According to the agreement, officers in schools will have to be properly vetted and required to  attend state- and city-mandated training, including a 40-hour National Association of School Resource Officers course. The agreement also specifies that officers will not participate in enforcing MPS code of conduct violations and that school conduct violations and student discipline will remain the responsibility of school administrators, not police officers. 

Despite the agreement, the bill’s authors said Wednesday that a law is needed to serve as an enforcement mechanism and address potential future noncompliance. 

“If that agreement is terminated, this legislation provides a similar compliance framework to ensure that both remain in compliance with Act 12,” Donovan said. “To prevent the ongoing and future non-compliance, consequences must be in place.” 

If the agreement is terminated, the bill would implement a timeline requiring a new agreement within 30 days, another 30 days for the city to certify with the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee that officers are trained and available. The district would then have 30 days to certify with the committee that officers are present in schools.

If there is noncompliance, 10% of the city’s shared revenue payment will be withheld by the state and 25% of the school district’s state aid payments would be withheld. 

Under the bill, MPS would be responsible for paying 75% of the cost for the school officers program, while the city would be responsible for the remaining 25%.

Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire) asked about the discrepancy between the 50-50 payment implemented by the judge and the one in the bill. 

Wanggaard said that bill assigns a larger share of the cost to the school district because  “it was MPS that made the schools less safe by not having officers in the school, not the city, and based on these factors and other conversations I’ve had, I believe MPS was the major cause of delaying returning officers to the schools.” However, he appeared open to amendments, noting that the bill is still pending. 

MPS is opposed to the bill, in part because of the difference in how it apportions the cost.

The district said in written testimony that school officials have been working on getting a memorandum of understanding with the city for over a year, sought the selection and training of police officers, and worked to negotiate a fair apportionment. The statement noted that the district has no authority to train or hire officers. 

The district statement endorsed a plan proposed by Gov. Tony Evers, which assigns 75% of the costs to the city and 25% to the district. The statement said that because “the school resource officers were part of a legislative deal negotiated without the participation of MPS and that provided hundreds of millions of dollars to the City of Milwaukee, the Governor’s proposal appears as the fairest.” 

The district statement also called for the state to reimplement a law in the 2009 budget that allowed districts to use generated funds to “purchase school safety equipment, fund the compensation costs of security officers, or fund other expenditures consistent with its school safety plan.”

“Whatever the apportionment, there should be no debate that school safety costs be adequately funded,” the district statement said. 

The Wisconsin Police Association and WILL support the bill, according to the state’s lobbying website.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

We Energies has invested in renewable energy such as this solar farm, yet it continues to push for new gas-powered plants. Columnist John Imes argues that these proposals would set Wisconsin back, delaying progress toward a smarter, clean energy future. (WEC Energy Group photo)

Wisconsin stands at a critical energy crossroads. We Energies’ plan to build massive new methane gas plants is a costly misstep that threatens to lock in high energy costs, undermine clean energy goals, and leave ratepayers footing the bill for outdated infrastructure.

At a time when clean energy and storage solutions are proving to be more reliable and cost-effective, doubling down on fossil fuel dependency is a financial and environmental mistake Wisconsin simply can’t afford.

Conflicts with We Energies’ climate goals and corporate objectives

We Energies has publicly committed to reducing carbon emissions by 80% by 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. Yet, its proposed gas plants move in the opposite direction — locking in long-term fossil fuel reliance when cleaner, cheaper alternatives are available.

One of the key justifications for these plants is the anticipated electricity demand from data centers. However, rapid advancements in AI-driven efficiency — such as DeepSeek — could dramatically cut data center energy consumption. If We Energies locks in billions for gas plants just as these efficiency gains accelerate, Wisconsin ratepayers could be left footing the bill for infrastructure that is no longer needed. Instead of overbuilding based on outdated projections, Wisconsin should prioritize flexible, adaptive energy solutions that can evolve with technology.

If Wisconsin continues to lag in clean energy, it risks losing business investment. Major corporations like Microsoft, Google, and Meta have committed to 100% carbon-free energy by 2030. We Energies’ push for new gas plants directly contradicts these corporate sustainability goals, which could drive investment out of the state.

Rather than doubling down on fossil fuels, Wisconsin should implement on-site demand response incentives for large energy users—reducing peak demand without costly new gas infrastructure.

Costly and unnecessary rush to gas

We Energies’ push for new gas plants isn’t just unnecessary — it’s an economic gamble that could burden ratepayers for decades. Natural gas prices remain volatile due to global market instability, making long-term reliance on gas a risky bet for Wisconsin’s energy future.

Meanwhile, states across the Midwest are rejecting new gas plants in favor of renewables, battery storage and energy efficiency. If Wisconsin fails to follow suit, residents and businesses could face skyrocketing energy costs and stranded fossil fuel assets that quickly become obsolete.

Wisconsin needs a plan to manage its clean energy transition

Rather than allowing utilities to dictate energy policy, Wisconsin must take a more strategic approach. Other states have already adopted comprehensive energy transition plans that prioritize renewables, storage and grid modernization. Without a coordinated strategy, Wisconsin risks falling behind — leaving businesses and consumers to bear unnecessary costs.

Business voices matter 

The recent GreenBiz 25 conference, where more than 2,500 sustainability professionals gathered, underscored a key reality: Businesses are proving they can “do well by doing good.” Companies are cutting energy use, reducing emissions and making strategic clean energy investments that align with both business and environmental goals.

Despite political resistance, responsible businesses are stepping up. But they can’t do it alone — Wisconsin policymakers must work with business leaders to create a regulatory environment that supports clean energy innovation rather than hindering it.

Battery storage is outpacing gas nationwide 

The outdated notion that natural gas is the only way to meet peak demand is being disproven across the country. Texas, California and even Alaska are deploying large-scale battery storage systems to replace gas-fired peaker plants. Battery storage costs have fallen 90% over the last decade, making it the clear economic winner over new fossil fuel generation.

Before committing billions to new gas plants, Wisconsin should first maximize cost-effective battery storage—proven technology that reduces emissions while keeping electricity rates stable.

Modernizing existing power plants is a smarter alternative

Instead of building expensive new gas infrastructure, Wisconsin should follow the lead of other states that are repurposing existing fossil fuel plants into clean energy hubs. By investing in solar, wind, and battery storage at existing power plant sites, Wisconsin can leverage existing grid connections and transition to a cleaner, more resilient energy system.

This “clean repowering” strategy allows for a smoother transition while maintaining grid stability—without saddling ratepayers with the cost of unnecessary new gas plants.

Wisconsin has a historic opportunity to lead the Midwest in clean energy innovation. But We Energies’ gas expansion plan is a step in the wrong direction.

Investing in clean energy solutions creates jobs, lowers costs and aligns with corporate sustainability goals. Locking in new gas plants while battery storage and renewables continue to outpace fossil fuels is an expensive mistake Wisconsin can’t afford.

The choice is clear: Do we cling to outdated, expensive fossil fuel infrastructure, or do we embrace a smarter, more resilient clean energy future?

The answer should be obvious—for our economy, our environment and the future of Wisconsin.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Wisconsin Supreme Court chambers. (Henry Redman/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin voters view both candidates in this spring’s state Supreme Court race slightly unfavorably, according to a poll released by the Marquette Law School Wednesday, but many voters still don’t know enough about either candidate to have an opinion. 

The poll did not assess how the candidates, Dane County Judge Susan Crawford and Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, would fare in a head-to-head matchup. 

The poll, which surveyed 864 registered voters in the state between Feb. 19-26, found that 29% of those surveyed have a favorable view of Schimel and 32% have an unfavorable view. Although Schimel is a former Republican state attorney general who has previously run two statewide campaigns, 38% of voters said they didn’t know enough about him. 

After the poll’s release, the Schimel campaign said Wisconsin’s liberals were repeating the mistakes that allowed President Donald Trump to win the state in November and characterized Crawford as “deeply flawed” and having “an extreme ideologically driven agenda.” 

Both candidates have been the subjects of negative ad campaigns by their opponents and opponents’ allies. 

“We’ve known all along that this race is going to be close,” the Crawford campaign said in a statement, which claimed that “right-wing billionaires like Elon Musk are trying to save Brad Schimel’s flailing campaign.”

Crawford had a lower favorability rating than Schimel, but far more voters still don’t know enough about her. The poll found that 19% of voters have a favorable view of her while 23% have an unfavorable view, but 58% still haven’t heard enough to form an opinion. That includes 54% of surveyed Democrats who say they don’t know enough about the liberal candidate in the race.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Max Glass-Lee uses an electronic communication device, picking words that the device then speaks to his mother, Tiffany Glass. (Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner)

Max Glass-Lee is an energetic 14-year-old who romps through the modest home on Madison’s West Side where he lives with his mother.

Born with Down syndrome and diagnosed as autistic, Max can read words and understand what’s spoken to him, but he doesn’t talk. Instead, he communicates with an electronic device about the size of an iPad, pressing words that the machine then speaks on his behalf. “Good-bye,” he tells his mother through the machine one recent morning, as she sits with him in his bedroom.

Tiffany Glass smiles affably, acknowledges her son’s assertion of independence, and steps out of the room.

Their interaction isn’t so different from those any number of parents and children have every day. For this parent and this child, however, it might have seemed unimaginable a generation ago.

Not so long ago, a child like Max was likely to spend his life inside the walls of an institution. Changes in social attitudes, medical ethics, and state and federal policy have made it possible for him to grow up and thrive at home.

One of those policies, says Tiffany Glass, is Medicaid — and without it, she believes Max’s life would have been much worse.

“His medical problems would not have been treated as effectively,” she says. “His quality of life would have been absolutely terrible. He would have been much more excluded from our community than he is now.”

Medicaid is the state-federal health insurance plan launched in the 1960s to provide health care for people living in poverty. In Wisconsin, it’s  best known as BadgerCare Plus, which covers primary health care and hospital care for people living below the federal poverty guideline. But Medicaid touches hundreds of thousands of other Wisconsin residents as well.

More than half of Wisconsin’s nursing home residents are covered by Medicaid after spending down most of their other personal savings and assets. Other Medicaid programs provide long-term skilled care to people living in their own homes or in the community — people who are frail and elderly, but also people living with disabilities.

“I’m not sure people are aware of the lifeline Medicaid is to so many people,” says Kim Marheine, state ombudsman for the Wisconsin Board on Aging and Long Term Care. “Without Medicaid some of these people have no place to go for services.”

Congress is currently rewriting the federal budget in ways that patients, families, health care providers and advocates fear will upend the program dramatically, ending coverage for millions who have few or no alternatives.

Washington budget battle

The Republican majority in the U.S. House wants to find $4.5 trillion in federal funds to pay for renewing tax cuts enacted in 2017 during President Donald Trump’s first term. On Feb. 25, the House, voting along party lines, cleared the way for a budget resolution that carves $880 billion over 10 years from programs under the purview of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

The text of the bill doesn’t doesn’t specify where those cuts come from — a point Republicans have emphasized to rebut claims that the vote was an attack on people’s health care. Nevertheless, Medicaid “is expected to bear much of the cuts,” according to KFF, a nonpartisan, nonprofit health news and research organization.

“What is in the jurisdiction of that committee? Well, the largest dollar amount is Medicaid,” said U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Black Earth) at a press conference in Madison Feb. 19. Advocates dismiss Republican denials, treating Medicaid cuts as a foregone conclusion and holding GOP lawmakers responsible.

“The draconian cuts to Medicaid that every single Wisconsin Republican voted for are an absolute wrecking ball,” says Joe Zepecki of Protect Our Care, a national advocacy group for the Affordable Care Act, Medicare and Medicaid. In that wrecking ball’s path, he says, are the state budget, tens of thousands of Wisconsin businesses that bill Medicaid, and more than a million state residents whose health care Medicaid covers.

Medicaid is funded jointly by federal and state governments. Federal law guarantees that the U.S. will pay at least half of the program’s cost, with the state paying for the rest. Wisconsin has a 60% federal contribution; the remaining 40% comes out of the state budget.

For fiscal year 2023, Wisconsin’s Medicaid expenditures totaled $12.5 billion, according to the Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission, a Congressional agency. The federal government paid just under $8.2 billion of that; Wisconsin paid the remainder, about $4.4 billion.

A Medicaid reduction on the scale that the budget resolution requires “will leave enormous shortfalls for the state heading into the next two years, all so Trump and his MAGA majorities can deliver another tax cut to huge corporations and CEOs like Elon Musk,” Zepecki says. “The federal money disappearing doesn’t mean the needs disappear, which is likely to force everyone else to pay even higher costs for their own health care.”

1 in 5 Wisconsin residents

According to the January 2025 enrollment numbers from the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS), about 1.3 million Wisconsin residents rely on Medicaid for day-to-day health care, long-term care or both — more than 1 out of 5 state residents.

They include more than 900,000 Wisconsinites who are enrolled in BadgerCare Plus. The health insurance plan for people up to age 65 covers doctor’s office visits, preventive care, surgery, hospital stays including childbirth, and other day-to-day health care needs for families living below the federal poverty guidelines. Children are covered in families with incomes up to 300% of the federal guideline; BadgerCare covers one-third of Wisconsin’s children.

Medicaid also covers alcoholism treatment, substance abuse treatment and other forms of care for mental health. “Medicaid is one of the largest payers of mental health care in the state,” says Tamara Jackson, policy analyst for the Wisconsin Board for People with Developmental Disabilities. It is the major funder of county mental health services, whether provided directly by a county agency or in partnership with a community agency, according to the Wiscons Counties Association.

Covering mental health is more than simply covering the cost of medications that may be prescribed. “Depression and anxiety medications are most effective in combination with the use of counseling services,” says Sheng Lee Yang, an Appleton clinical social worker. But if patients prescribed a medication aren’t able to get counseling as well, “their symptoms are only being treated at a 50% rate. That’s not real effective.”

Medicaid is part of health care all across Wisconsin. A study from Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families released in January found that residents of rural counties in the U.S. are more likely to rely on Medicaid for their health coverage than urban residents. In 27 northern and central Wisconsin rural counties, the share of children on Medicaid is higher than the state average, the study found.

Medicaid’s reach doesn’t stop there, however. Through nearly 20 different programs, Medicaid covers the health care of more than 260,000 additional Wisconsin residents.

For about 10,800 frail, elderly people who could not otherwise afford nursing home care, Medicaid pays the cost — about 60% of the state’s nursing home population.

Medicaid has also expanded beyond primary health care or nursing home care. Programs launched over the last several decades now allow eligible people who need long-term care to get the same services through Medicaid at home or in the community that they would receive in a nursing home.

To join those programs states apply to the federal government with proposals that would waive standard Medicaid rules. The idea is that if someone who needs long-term care can remain at home or in another homelike setting, the overall cost of care will be far lower than in a nursing home, stretching the Medicaid dollar farther.

More than 43,000 frail elderly or disabled adults in Wisconsin receive long-term care at home or in the community — in assisted living, for instance — under Medicaid waivers. Family Care began piloting in individual Wisconsin counties about 25 years ago as a nursing home alternative. It has since gone statewide, joined by allied programs that allow people to customize their care plans.

For elderly relatives who needed the intensive level of care offered by a nursing home, Family Care “gave them a tremendous alternative to skilled nursing care,” says Janet Zander, the advocacy and public policy coordinator for the Greater Wisconsin Agency on Aging Resources.

“A lot of work Wisconsin has been doing, and other states as well, has been shifting how we provide care to people’s homes,” says Jackson.

Care at home instead of an institution

Beth Barton’s daughter, Maggie, was born 25 years ago with cerebral palsy. She doesn’t talk and is not able to move about on her own, and for her whole life she’s needed complex medical care, Barton says.

One of Medicaid’s earliest waiver programs is named for Katie Beckett, a child from Iowa whose story led the Reagan administration in the 1980s to authorize long-term health care at home for children with disabilities instead of only in a hospital or nursing home. In Wisconsin, there are about 13,500 children enrolled in the state’s Katie Beckett waiver program.

When Maggie was a child, the Katie Beckett waiver enabled the Barton family to care for her at home. The family’s health care comes through the company plan where Beth Barton’s husband works. Medicaid served as a secondary insurer for Maggie, covering insurance copayments and for her care that the family insurance didn’t pay for.

Growing up, Maggie was able to attend Lakeland School, a public Walworth County school for children with disabilities. School “was difficult” her mother says, but it also provided rewarding interaction for her daughter. The school’s therapeutic pool became part of Maggie’s daily routine, where “she could be free,” Barton says, able to enjoy sensory experiences outside her wheelchair.

After Maggie turned 18, she was enrolled in IRIS — a Medicaid-funded long-term care program. While Family Care works though contracts with managed care providers, IRIS, a more recent variation, allows people to make their own arrangements for services, including home health care and personal care.

IRIS Medicaid funding helps pay for a social worker who visits four times a year and respite care when Barton can’t be at home. It also covers home modifications, such as an accessibility ramp.

Without the support Medicaid has provided throughout Maggie’s life, Barton believes her daughter might well have ended up in an institution. She’s not optimistic about that option.

“Her unique needs are best met one-one,” Barton says. “If we didn’t have private duty nursing, if we didn’t have Medicaid to meet those needs, I honestly don’t think she’d be with us.”

Children’s long-term support

Another Medicaid waiver covers certain purchases children with disabilities need as they grow up.

Danielle Bauer’s 3-year-old son, Henry, was born with Down syndrome and has also been diagnosed with autism. The family lives in Wausau, and Wisconsin’s Children’s Long-term Support waiver helped cover the cost of a sensory chair that offers Henry “a quiet retreat to prevent meltdowns,” Bauer says. The family also got coverage for a specialized high chair that will grow with him as he gets older.

“It has made a huge difference in his quality of life,” Bauer says of her son. “He is capable of so much more, but without these supports, families don’t have resources to help kids like him.”

Until Jessica Seawright’s son was born nine years ago, she and her husband had no inkling their child would have a disability, let alone a serious one. Because of a chromosome abnormality, he has cerebral palsy and uses a wheelchair.

“We didn’t have anything show up in terms of prenatal testing,” Seawright says. “This came out of the blue.”

The Children’s Long-term Support waiver helped the family purchase a wheel-chair van to transport their son. It also helped cover the cost of widening a doorway in their home on the South Side of Milwaukee so he can get into the bathroom using his chair.

Seawright is a social worker and therapist. Her employer provides the family’s primary insurance, with the couple paying about $300 a month toward the premium as well as covering their own medical and dental copayments.

The Katie Beckett waiver has made it possible for Medicaid, through BadgerCare, to pick up her son’s medical costs, Seawright says. He often has to go to the emergency room and has other complex medical needs. He has recurring seizures, and he has trouble swallowing and needs a gastric tube. He’s been prescribed various medications and formula supplements as well.

Without that support, she says it’s likely that the family would burn through the $5,000 annual cap on their out-of-pocket health care costs.

“We would be making really tough choices — what can we afford out of pocket each year? It would be a question of how often we pay for foot braces when he outgrows them,” Seaward says — along with the medications, supplements and formula he needs.

“It’s not that we don’t want to pay for our fair share, but with the cost of his care it’s not possible to keep up with,” she says.

Moving past ‘a dark part of our history’

Tiffany Glass is a University of Wisconsin research scientist, studying why children with Down syndrome often have trouble eating, drinking and swallowing. She was in the process of deciding what direction she wanted her research career to take when her son Max was born; his diagnosis pointed the way.

“Up until the mid-1980s in the United states, a lot of children with Down syndrome and other disabilities were institutionalized, because their communities didn’t have the resources to accommodate them,” Glass says.  

UW medical ethicist Dr. Norman Fost wrote in a 2020 journal article that as recently as the late 1970s it wasn’t unheard of for parents to allow newborns with Down syndrome to die without medical intervention.  

“It’s a really dark part of our history,” Glass says.

Medicaid changed that for Max — supporting him for his medical care, communication (it paid for the electronic tablet that speaks for him), and  activities of daily living.

“He needs help with all of those things,” Glass says. “It adds up to needing skilled care 24 hours a day, seven days a week. For his whole life he’s required that type of care, and he probably always will.”

In addition to providing resources for Max’s care at home, Medicaid has also enabled Glass to pursue her scientific calling. Without it, her research career might have stopped before it started, she says.

Regular child care centers are unlikely to take someone whose disabilities are as severe as his, she has found, but the children’s long-term support waiver has covered the cost of respite care.

“That has allowed me to work outside the home for a decade as a research scientist,” says Glass. “If Medicaid hadn’t been there, I probably would not have been able to develop my research career. I would have had to stay home — to the detriment of scientific research.”

Now, however, she and countless others who have come to rely on the program — adults and children, people with disabilities and caregivers for elderly relatives — have grown anxious about whether they will still be able to count on the care that Medicaid has made possible.  

“Those arrangements are still very fragile,” Glass says. “We’re all very worried that if funding for Medicaid is reduced or eliminated, that could have really terrible implications for our families.”

This story is Part One in a series. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Dane County Judge Susan Crawford speaks at an event held by the Rotary Club of Milwaukee and Milwaukee Press Club as she campaigns for Wisconsin Supreme Court. (Photo by Henry Redman/Wisconsin Examiner)

Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Susan Crawford accused her opponent Brad Schimel of being a “partisan politician” at an event Tuesday hosted by the Rotary Club of Milwaukee and Milwaukee Press Club. Her comments come as both candidates have tried to claim they will be the more impartial justice. 

The fight over impartiality has outlined this year’s campaign in contrast with 2023, when Justice Janet Protasiewicz won her seat, and majority control of the Court for the body’s liberals, by proclaiming her “values” that support a woman’s right to access abortion and that the state’s previous legislative maps unfairly benefited Republicans. 

“I would ask voters and the media to look at the difference between the campaigns and the candidates,” Crawford said. “I have never taken a position on any case or any issue before the Supreme Court. And anyone who wants to support me needs to know that I am not making any promises.” 

But she said Schimel, a Waukesha County judge and former Republican state attorney general, has built a career as an elected Republican and taken stances on cases that will likely come before the Court in its next term, including cases about Wisconsin’s 1849 law that has been interpreted as a blanket ban on abortion and a lawsuit against Act 10, the controversial law that limited collective bargaining rights for most public employees. 

Crawford also pointed to millions of dollars in assistance Schimel’s campaign has gotten from Elon Musk and comments, reported this week by the Washington Post, that he told a group of supporters in Jefferson County that President Donald Trump had been “screwed over” by the Wisconsin Supreme Court when it ruled against his effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election. 

Just days before Schimel’s comments were made public, he told reporters after a speech at a Wisconsin Counties Association conference that he didn’t know enough about the case to determine if it was decided correctly. 

“He apparently has no objection to Elon Musk’s canvassers going door to door, saying that ‘Brad Schimel is going to uphold the Trump agenda,’” she said. “You know, he has not said anything to put a stop to that. So he’s got a long history as an extreme partisan. He’s run for partisan office something like five times, and he’s running this race very much as a partisan politician.” 

Throughout her remarks, Crawford said that if she’s elected, she’d work with all six of the other justices, not just the liberals — taking digs at comments Schimel and some of the Court’s conservatives have made previously — but that she defines being a judicial liberal as someone who stands up for people’s rights and how the law can be used to protect those rights. 

“If what people mean by liberal is that I’m going to work to protect the rights of every Wisconsinite on the Supreme Court, that I view our laws and our Constitution as tools to protect the rights of Wisconsinites, then I embrace that label, because that is what I will go about,” she said.

Last week, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported that Schimel had said in a radio interview the Court’s liberals, all women, were “driven by their emotions,” when hearing oral arguments in a case about the 1849 abortion law. And in recent years, conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley has frequently attacked her liberal colleagues in published decisions, accusing them of being mouthpieces for the Democratic Party. 

“I think there is a little bit too much talk and too much emphasis, particularly by my opponent, on the makeup of the court and these so-called lines between who’s the majority and who’s the minority,” she said. “My opponent, unfortunately, has been lobbying attacks against the same justices on the Supreme Court. You won’t hear me doing that. I intend to work with every other member of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is a body of seven justices, and they need to talk to each other.” 

In a statement, the Schimel campaign said the panel of reporters moderating Tuesday’s event didn’t ask tough enough questions and that Crawford wouldn’t be an objective justice.

“Susan Crawford continued her campaign of hoodwinking Wisconsin voters today by spreading falsehoods and pushing the radical agenda of her Democrat handlers to a sympathetic press,” Schimel spokesperson Jacob Fischer said. “What Crawford should have been pressed on was her weak on crime penchant for releasing pedophiles and murderers back onto Wisconsin streets, her willingness to offer two congressional seats in exchange for financial support, or how she sold out her objectivity to the agendas of George Soros, Bernie Sanders, and other extreme liberals. Unlike Susan Crawford, who is clearly unfit to represent the interests of Wisconsin as an impartial justice, Judge Brad Schimel is committed to restoring fairness to the Court and saving Wisconsin from the Democrats’ radical agenda.”

During the event, Crawford pointed to occasions she would have sided against the Court’s liberals and times she issued rulings that she didn’t personally like but upheld because it was the law. 

She said that when hearing challenges to the lame duck laws passed by Republicans in the Legislature in 2019 to take powers away from the governor and attorney general before Democrats Tony Evers and Josh Kaul could take power, the actions of the Legislature “left a bad taste in my mouth,” but she upheld some of those laws. 

“That’s a case where, as a lawyer, I might have taken a different position as an advocate, but as a judge, I was applying the law to the facts of that case, and I came to a narrow decision,” she said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Gov. Tony Evers said Trump's tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China would impact everyone. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.

Gov. Tony Evers criticized congressional Republicans Tuesday, saying that the impact of President Donald Trump’s tariffs will be “significant” and felt by everyone, especially Wisconsin’s farmers. 

Trump’s 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada and increased tariffs to 20% on goods from China went into effect Tuesday morning. Both China and Canada have announced retaliatory tariffs against the U.S., and Mexico has threatened them. The sweeping tariffs are expected to increase costs for Americans on everything from fresh fruit to electronics to cars.

“It sucks, it’s bad — no good,” Evers said at a WisPolitics event. 

About half of Wisconsin’s exports go to the three countries. 

“It’s gonna impact our farmers, let’s just think about how that plays out. They’re the chief buyer of our products” Evers said after the event. “Let’s just talk about cheese. We won’t be able to sell that… Now, is that a big deal for Wisconsin? Not everybody eats cheese, right? But it’s a $1.8 billion industry, and it’s going to be just crushed.”

Evers accused congressional Republicans of abdicating their duty in allowing the tariffs to move forward.

“I am just so disappointed in Congress,” Evers said at. “There is no legislative branch. … If Congress thought this through for two minutes, they would understand how bad tariffs are.” 

Evers told reporters that his administration will work to challenge the tariffs in court, but that “at the end of the day, we gotta get Congress to do something. 

“Is there anybody on the Republican side that believes what’s happening in DC is appropriate? I think there are a whole bunch. … They’re just afraid to come out and talk about it,” Evers said. 

The tariffs are being implemented in the midst of Wisconsin’s state budget cycle. 

Evers has proposed increasing the state’s budget by about 20%, including hiking K-12 and higher education spending and cutting taxes. The increases would be funded with revenue from the federal government, state taxes and the state’s $4 billion budget surplus.

Evers said the tariffs and potential federal funding cuts could “of course” affect the budget, and that the threats are making it difficult to plan. His plan would not spend the whole surplus, but would leave the state with over $500 million in the state’s “checking account”, which he had said was because of the unpredictability of the Trump administration. The state also has a rainy day fund of about $1.9 billion.

“We weren’t certain about the economy. We weren’t certain about what’s going to happen in Washington D.C. … I’m questioning whether that $500 million is enough to help us get through this,” Evers said. 

Superintendent race and DPI 

During the event, Evers also again declined to endorse a candidate in the upcoming state Superintendent race. Incumbent Jill Underly, who has Democratic-backing, is running against education consultant Brittany Kinser, a school voucher proponent with Republican-backing.

“I’m not putting myself into that race,” Evers said, noting that he didn’t endorse in the last election for the position four years ago. 

While he wouldn’t endorse, Evers did comment on issues at the center of the race, including state testing standards, school funding and Underly’s handling of the issues while in office. 

Evers said Underly’s budget proposal, which would have invested over $4 billion in public education, was too high. 

“There was no way that we could take care of schools and other issues,” Evers said. “I mean it was ridiculous.” His own proposal includes over $3 billion for Wisconsin K-12 education. Republican lawmakers have criticized both plans, saying they are unrealistic increases. 

The Department of Public Instruction (DPI) approved changes to the names and cut scores used for achievement levels on the state’s standardized tests last year — a move that Evers as well as Republican lawmakers have criticized. 

Evers said his “issue” was not necessarily the outcome of the testing changes, but rather with a lack of communication with the public about the changes. The process for the testing changes included input from over 80 educators and other stakeholders, but Evers said the changes should have been vetted publicly before approval. 

“[Underly] didn’t run it by anyone,” Evers said. 

Evers said he was “probably” going to veto a Republican bill that would reverse the recent changes and tie the state’s testing standards to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a nationwide assessment meant to provide representative data about student achievement. The bill is in the Senate, having passed the Assembly last month.

“I have a strong belief that [DPI is] an independent agency and they can make those decisions, so having the Legislature suddenly say ‘well, we’re the experts here and this is what the cut scores should be,’ I think that’s wrong-headed.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

William Rutter, USDA plant pathologist and nematologist, examines sprouting plants for research on managing Meloidogyne enterolobii and other root-knot nematodes. This photo was taken at the U.S. Vegetable Laboratory in Charleston, South Carolina, on Jan. 28, 2021. (Photo by Lance Cheung/USDA.)

Mass terminations at the U.S. Department of Agriculture are “crippling” the agency, upending federal workers’ lives and leaving farmers and rural communities without needed support, according to interviews with 15 recently fired employees stationed across the U.S.

Since taking power Jan. 20, the Trump administration has quickly frozen funding and fired federal workers en masse. USDA terminations started Feb. 13, the day Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins was sworn in. Rollins welcomed the quasi-governmental Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, led by billionaire Elon Musk, to find parts of the USDA budget to cut.

Terminated employees helped farmers build irrigation systems, battled invasive diseases that could “completely decimate” crops that form whole industries and assisted low-income seniors in rural areas in fixing leaky roofs. That work will now be significantly delayed — perhaps indefinitely — as remaining employees’ workloads grow, the employees said.

“It’s really crippling the agency,” said Bryan Mathis, a former USDA employee based in New Mexico.

Caught up in the terminations are single parents and new moms, recent hires and longtime employees, and military veterans. Some had uprooted their lives months ago to start their new career. Justin Butt, also based in New Mexico, said that without the health insurance and parental leave offered by his federal job, he and his wife may hold off on having a child.

Many of the USDA employees were on probationary status, meaning they had worked less than a year (or three years, in some instances) in the civil service. However, several had put in years working for the government and had been permanent employees at other federal departments.

The terminations have left employees distrustful and leery of returning to public service. “I don’t feel safe,” said Latisha Caldwell-Bullis, who served in the Army for 21 years before joining a USDA office in Oklahoma. “The whole reason I got back into the federal system was because it has job security.”

The USDA did not return a request for comment. In an interview with Brownfield Ag News on Tuesday, Rollins said her department has done “significant reinstatements” but added new job cuts might be coming. “I do think that moving forward, it will be more intentional,” she said.

The American Farm Bureau Federation, which represents farmers and rural communities across the country, said cuts at USDA should be “strategic.” The farm bureau has supported the Trump administration.

“Reports are still coming in about staffing decisions at USDA, which are causing concern in rural communities and beyond,” Sam Kieffer, the farm bureau’s vice president of public policy, said in a statement to Investigate Midwest. “USDA plays a vital role in ensuring a safe and abundant food supply, from loan officers and disaster recovery experts to food inspectors, animal disease specialists and more.

“We support the goal of responsibly spending taxpayer dollars,” the statement continued, “but we urge the administration to empower the Secretary to make strategic staffing decisions, knowing the key roles USDA staff play in the nation’s food supply.”

Leading up to the terminations, a feeling of unease pervaded USDA offices, said a former employee based in the Midwest who requested anonymity to protect job prospects. The employee’s agency within the USDA used to have regular town halls, but they were canceled after the “fork in the road” email — which promised federal workers a buyout — hit inboxes in late January. “Then, basically, it was crickets from our leadership,” the employee said.

As news of mass firings at other agencies circulated, USDA staffers wondered if they were next. Some cried in offices. Others coped by telling jokes.

The firings were haphazard.

Many received the same email late at night on Feb. 13 saying they were terminated immediately. Jacob Zortman, who sold his house in Kansas in January to move to Nevada, received his work phone on Friday, Feb. 14, only to be fired the following Tuesday, he said.

Another employee said his job title was listed incorrectly on the termination letter. One said they had received an award days before their termination. Several employees said their supervisors had no idea they were fired.

Mathis, who worked for the Forest Service, received a phone call on Monday, Feb. 17, a federal holiday, from a higher-up, who told him he was fired, he said. His direct supervisor was instructed to terminate him but refused.

“It kind of went up the chain,” he said.

Doug Berry, who worked for the USDA’s Rural Development agency in Texas, said, when he attempted to get a copy of his performance review last week, it was “mysteriously blank.” He then asked his supervisor to write him a recommendation but was rebuffed. The supervisor mentioned an interview Berry gave to USA TODAY, in which he said his agency “helps the towns that voted for Trump every day.”

“I don’t know who’s watching what, but as soon as they saw my comments, any good will evaporated,” he said.

Another former USDA employee, who requested anonymity to protect job prospects, said the terminations will result in a leadership void. The job cuts affected training intended to give the new generation of leaders a holistic view of the agency.

“It’s just going to create a lot of chaos,” the employee said.

DOGE claims cuts are for efficiency

DOGE’s stated goal is to improve efficiency across the government, but former employees said they were already working on improving government service efficiencies.

When one former employee joined the department six months ago, they faced a five-year backlog. They had worked through three years when they were terminated, said the employee, who is based in a Western state and requested anonymity to protect future job prospects. Now, other workers will “have to pick up the slack,” meaning delays for projects that farmers and ranchers want done.

Stephanie Gaspar worked for a USDA agency that helped prevent plant, animal and insect diseases from entering the nation’s food supply. Her job was to decrease IT costs. “I and my team had already reduced tens of thousands of dollars of the budget,” she said. “It’s going to cost more in the long run because there’s not enough people to do this work.”

Gaspar, based in Florida, said she had worked hard to get her position. “This ultimately was going to be a career that would pull me out of poverty,” she said. “I’m not some rich federal worker. I’m a working mom.”

Rural development workers axed

One of the USDA’s many responsibilities is providing financial assistance to rural, low-income communities. For example, a small town in central West Virginia requested USDA’s help to find funding for a new police cruiser.

Rural Development was also coordinating a plan to help impoverished families access transportation to medical care, said Carrie Decker, a single mom of four children who worked in the West Virginia office. “You have three generations sharing one vehicle, and people have to work and get to school, so finding time to go to a dentist appointment is not high on the priority list,” she said. The project now lacks USDA support, which could delay it.

After the Trump administration took over, she and her coworkers were instructed not to perform community outreach, which was “90% of what we do,” Decker said. Decker worries the lack of investment in rural areas — which Trump largely won in his reelection bid — will have long-lasting consequences.

“We’re going to see less funding into these critical access places that really, really need to have it and have needed it for decades,” she said. “I think what’s going to happen is these rural places across the nation are going to continue to decline instead of see the growth and opportunity that we were hopeful for.”

Two primary goals of rural development are to provide affordable housing or to help maintain low-income seniors’ homes.

One former USDA employee in the South, who requested anonymity to protect future job prospects, said they were hired to help expedite environmental compliance reviews, which were required before any funding was dispersed. Before they started, the employee said, another employee performed these duties on top of a full-time job.

The situation delayed help to seniors, the employee said. “Their roof is being covered up by a tarp because it’s been blown off by a storm, and they can’t get their grant money to get their roof fixed until compliance reviews are done,” they said. Former coworkers would “basically hound the guy to get it done. It wasn’t efficient.”

Risks of possible crop disease outbreaks

The USDA also invests heavily in preventing diseases among plants and animals essential to the food supply.

But the department fired employees working to address the bird flu that’s contributing to skyrocketing egg prices, according to NBC News. The USDA said it was trying to rehire them.

Matthew Moscou worked at a lab in Minnesota, where he helped monitor diseases that could wipe out wheat production in the U.S., he said. He spent the past two-and-a-half years learning from a long-tenured employee so institutional knowledge could be passed on, but it’s unlikely that information is retained now, he said.

“They’ve destroyed the institution,” he said.

Without labs like this, crop diseases, such as wheat-killing stem rust, could flourish, he said.

“Either we’re going to have to rethink how we’re doing this whole thing, or we’re going to have a significant collapse in the long run,” Moscou said. “This current push has really cut us off at the knees.”

Editor’s note: Since Investigate Midwest interviewed Moscou, he has been reinstated, at least temporarily, according to his LinkedIn profile.

This article first appeared on Investigate Midwest and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A nurse administers a measles, mumps and rubella vaccine to a patient in Utah. More states are loosening vaccine mandates, scaling back vaccine promotion efforts and taking other steps that likely will lower vaccination rates. (Photo by George Frey/Getty Images)

More states are loosening vaccine mandates, scaling back vaccine promotion efforts and taking other steps likely to lower vaccination rates — even as a major measles outbreak spreads in Texas.

Meanwhile, public health experts worry that the confirmation of vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services could add fuel to such efforts, leading to the resurgence of long-tamed infectious diseases. Kennedy has made numerous baseless or false claims about vaccines, including linking them to autism and cancer and saying there is “poison” in the coronavirus vaccine.

This week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which Kennedy now oversees, canceled the upcoming meeting of a scientific panel that was slated to discuss next year’s flu vaccines. Also this week, an unvaccinated child died of measles in Texas — the country’s first measles death in a decade. The outbreak, which has spilled into neighboring New Mexico, has now grown to more than 130 cases.

Already, vaccination rates are lower than they were before the pandemic. The COVID-19 vaccines saved millions of lives, but many Americans bristled at vaccine mandates, and disinformation and rapidly evolving public health advice undermined many people’s trust in scientific authorities.

Changing attitudes have had an impact: Vaccination rates among children born in 2020 and 2021 declined by between 1.3 and 7.8 percentage points for recommended shots, compared with children born in 2018 and 2019, according to a September report by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The anti-vaccination trend is “the antithesis of public health,” Dr. Scott Rivkees, a pediatric endocrinologist who served as Florida’s surgeon general and health secretary from 2019 to 2021, told Stateline.

“The role of people in departments of health and the role of people in health care and medicine is to promote health and make sure the public is safe,” Rivkees told Stateline. “There’s such a rich history of legal precedent, such a rich history of public health precedent, saying that society benefits by having individuals vaccinated.”

In all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, children must receive certain vaccines to attend school. Every state offers an exemption for children who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons. Thirty states plus the district allow families to skip the vaccinations for religious reasons, 13 states grant exemptions for religious or personal reasons, and two states — Louisiana and Minnesota — don’t require people to specify whether their objection is religious or personal.

Five states — California, Connecticut, Maine, New York and West Virginia — don’t allow nonmedical exemptions.

Republican officials in more than a dozen states have introduced legislation to loosen vaccine rules or otherwise reduce their use.

Legislation in Arizona would make it easier to claim a school exemption, while GOP-sponsored bills in Connecticut, Minnesota, New York and Oregon would limit or prohibit vaccine mandates for adults.

As childhood immunization rates fall, Wisconsin urges families to get kids vaccinated

In Idaho, a Senate panel last week debated a bill that would ban mRNA vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccines, for a decade. Montana and Mississippi lawmakers considered but defeated similar proposals. And in West Virginia — one of the five states that currently does not allow nonmedical exemptions to school vaccine requirements — lawmakers are advancing a bill that would allow religious and philosophical objections.

“Public health will always, to some extent, involve politics, because it requires resources,” said Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Offit serves on the FDA panel that was supposed to discuss next year’s flu vaccines.

“But it doesn’t have to be partisan, which is what has happened.”

A shift in Louisiana

Earlier this month, Dr. Ralph Abraham, Louisiana’s first-ever surgeon general, sent a memo to staff at the Louisiana Department of Health saying they should no longer recommend that Louisianans get “any and all vaccines.” The memo also said the agency will “no longer promote mass vaccination.” Instead, Abraham said, health workers should encourage residents to discuss the risks and benefits of vaccines with their doctors.

The memo puts an end to the Louisiana health department’s robust history of promoting vaccinations through local public health departments, community health fairs and media campaigns.

“Vaccines should be treated with nuance, recognizing differences between seasonal vaccines and childhood immunizations, which are an important part of providing immunity to our children. … Getting vaccinated, like any other health procedure, is an individual’s personal choice,” the memo states.

The agency did not respond to multiple requests for comment via email and phone call. But in a letter posted to the department’s website earlier this month, Abraham wrote that the state had made several missteps during the pandemic, including: promoting “inaccurate and inconsistent guidance on masking, poor decisions to close schools, unjustifiable mandates on civil liberties, and false claims regarding natural immunity.”

Abraham wrote that vaccinations can be good for some, but can be harmful for others, and that for decades public health has been driven by an ideology that “the sacrifice of a few is acceptable and necessary for the ‘greater good.’”

“We should reject this utilitarian approach and restore medical decision-making to its proper place: between doctors and patients,” he wrote.

Louisiana Republican lawmakers have embraced this sentiment, saying that after the COVID-19 pandemic, they want to see less government involvement in vaccinations.

“I’m pleased that Dr. Abraham has taken this approach,” said Republican state Rep. Kathy Edmonston, who last year authored laws prohibiting Louisiana schools from requiring COVID-19 vaccinations and mandating that they provide exemption information to parents. “I’m not against vaccinations. He’s not against vaccinations. I’m for people being able to make up their own mind.”

Jill Hines, co-director of Health Freedom Louisiana, a group that opposes vaccine mandates, dismissed the significance of ending mass vaccination campaigns, because “everybody should have a primary care physician if they want one, and nobody is really denied access to a vaccine.”

But Kimberly Hood, former assistant secretary of the Louisiana Office of Public Health, noted that the state is largely rural, and many residents don’t have easy access to a health care provider.

“Failing to promote vaccination may not sound like a huge deal, but it actually invalidates what we in public health have seen and learned for many, many years, which is that you have to make it easy, affordable, accessible,” Hood told Stateline.

“It’s not just stepping away from vaccination; we’re stepping away from our kind of obligation together, what it means to live together in a society.”

Staying the course in Mississippi

But in neighboring Mississippi, which is also Republican-dominated, GOP leaders are staying the course — at least so far. More than two dozen anti-vaccine bills have died in the Mississippi legislature in the past two years, including this year’s proposed ban on mRNA vaccines.

The state struggled with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy during the pandemic, and in 2022 Republican Gov. Tate Reeves signed into law a measure banning COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

But for years, Mississippi maintained one of the highest childhood vaccination rates in the nation. The state slipped from first to third between 2023 and 2024, after a federal judge ruled that the state must allow religious exemptions. Its current childhood vaccination rate is 97.5%, well above the 91% national average but lower than the 99.3% rate it had in 2019.

“Our law is still in effect, and if you don’t have a medical or religious exemption, then you must be fully vaccinated to attend school or go to day care in Mississippi,” said Dr. Daniel Edney, Mississippi’s state health officer. “The science is clear and in Mississippi we stand on the science.”

Edney said he hasn’t faced any political pressure to reverse course. Unlike in Louisiana, where Republican Gov. Jeff Landry tapped Abraham — a former three-term Republican congressman who co-chaired his transition committee — as surgeon general, Edney was selected by the 11-member Mississippi State Board of Health. The governor chooses the members of that panel, but they serve staggered four-year terms.

“I have zero pressure from the governor or legislative leadership regarding our approach to vaccines,” Edney told Stateline. “We’re not focused on politics. We don’t blow in the wind based on what administration is in power.”

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

President Donald Trump delivers remarks during a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron in the East Room at the White House on Feb. 24, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump announced Monday that tariffs would be placed on Canada and Mexico, and additional ones on China, beginning Tuesday, a move that could affect the cost of goods anywhere from tequila to cars to iPhones.

While at the White House, and alongside Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, the president said he would levy 25% tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico and additional 10% tariffs on China.

“The tariffs, they’re all set. They take effect tomorrow,” Trump said.

Trump said that there was “no room left for Mexico or Canada” to make a deal with the United States to avoid the tariffs, which are meant to punish those countries for fentanyl trafficking.

“Just so you understand, vast amounts of fentanyl have poured into our country from Mexico, and as you know, also from China, where it goes to Mexico and goes to Canada,” Trump said.

The comments came during an event at the White House to tout building new semiconductor manufacturing plants in Arizona.

Trump also argued that the tariffs would encourage Canada and Mexico to build car manufacturing plants in the U.S. to avoid being hit by the tariffs.

“What they have to do is build their car plants, frankly, and other things in the United States, in which case they have no tariffs,” Trump said.

Stocks quickly slipped after the announcement. Tariffs are essentially taxes on foreign goods that are paid by those importing the goods.

Trump initially walked back his threat of placing tariffs on Feb. 1 on Mexico and Canada, but still placed a 10% tariff on China. He gave Mexico and Canada a month to address drug trafficking and unauthorized immigration.

Last week, Trump said that he would instead place tariffs on April 2, and then over the weekend said March 4 would be the date for tariffs.

Democrats have raised issues with tariffs, especially those from states that border Canada.

Washington state Democratic Sen. Patty Murray said during a Monday press conference that Trump’s threats of tariffs have already impacted the U.S. – Canada economic relationship.

“We depend on our trading partnerships with Canada on a broad range of products and things,” Murray said. “We are already seeing our Northern communities that rely on tourism from Canada drop significantly because of the way they’re being treated.”

Minnesota Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar said during the press conference that the tariffs would harm farmers as well.

“This has been one of the, really, crown jewels of (the) American economy, the fact that we are able to export agriculture and have free trade back and forth,” Klobuchar said.

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report. 

The Wisconsin Department of Corrections Madison offices. (Photo by Henry Redman/Wisconsin Examiner)

On Wednesday, April 9, at the Kolb Center of the Fox Lake Correctional Institution, the Wisconsin Department of Corrections (DOC) will hold a Family & Friend Forum where relatives and friends of the incarcerated can  provide feedback to the DOC about the prison system’s policies.

The DOC “recognizes the crucial role that support from family and friends plays in rehabilitation and successful reentry into the community,” the department stated in its announcement of the session. 

“As part of our commitment to serving the people of Wisconsin with transparency and accountable decision-making, Secretary Jared Hoy and department leadership want to hear directly from the loved ones of those engaged with the DOC,” the announcement said.

The Family & Friends event will be held from 10 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on Wednesday, April 9, at Kolb Center at Fox Lake Correctional Institution, W10237 Lake Emily Road, Fox Lake.

Registration is required, and the event is limited to 100 people. Spots will be accepted on a first-come, first-served basis.

Registrants must be 18 years or older.

All registrants will receive an email confirming their seat along with additional instructions.

To register online, go to https://doc.wi.gov/Pages/AboutDOC/FriendsAndFamilyForums.aspx and tap the “Reserve A Seat” button.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin Republicans introduced new bills targeting transgender youth last week after President Donald Trump signed several related executive orders. People gather in New Orleans for Transgender Day of Visibility on March 31, 2023. (Photo by Greg LaRose/Louisiana Illuminator)

Wisconsin Republicans are again turning their focus towards LGBTQ+ youth, especially those who are transgender, introducing bills that would prohibit gender-affirming care for youth, ban students from playing on certain sports teams and mandate that school districts get permission from parents when using different names and pronouns for students. 

The four bills come as President Donald Trump has signed a slate of executive orders targeting transgender people. The bills have received pushback from the Wisconsin Legislative LGBTQ+ Caucus, the Transgender Parent and Non-Binary Advocacy Caucus and LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations. 

Sen. Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit), chair of the LGBTQ+ caucus, told the Wisconsin Examiner that the bills are “part of broader national Republican effort” to attack trans people. 

“Republicans are now trying to essentially legislate trans people out of existence by denying medically necessary life-saving care, by preventing people from playing team sports, by trying to make it harder for people to be called by the name and pronouns that they go by when they’re in school,” Spreitzer said. 

Targeting transgender athletes

The first two bills would ban transgender girls in Wisconsin K-12 schools and transgender women attending UW System schools and Wisconsin technical colleges from participating on teams that reflect their gender identity. 

The bills’ introduction followed the Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association decision in early February to change its policy, which previously permitted transgender athletes to compete on teams consistent with their gender identity. In response to an executive order signed by Trump, the new policy prohibits an athlete from competing on a team that does not match the biological sex that they were assigned when they were born.

“Working in consultation with legal counsel, our Board updated this policy to ensure clarity is provided to our membership as they work to comply with new federal guidance from the White House,” Stephanie Hauser, executive director of the WIAA, said in a statement. 

The WIAA’s decision was celebrated by Reps. Barbara Dittrich (R-Oconomowoc) and Dan Knodl (R-Germantown), who have led unsuccessful efforts in the Legislature to restrict what teams transgender athletes play on for many years. The lawmakers said in a column that they would reintroduce a bill “to secure women’s and girls’ rights in Wisconsin.”

FAIR Wisconsin Executive Director Abigail Swetz said in a statement that sports should be an inclusive space for youth. 

“When an athlete gets to play sports on a team where they belong, that can make such a huge difference, and that is especially true for our trans athletes when the trans community is under attack from a hostile federal government. Now is the time to show our trans kids love and support, not exclusion,” Swetz said. “Our trans kids and young adults, and all trans Wisconsinites, need to know that there are so many people in this state who love you exactly as you are. The fact that a few members of the Wisconsin legislature want to play political games with your joy is inappropriate.” 

Swetz said in an email to the Wisconsin Examiner that the decisions by lawmakers and by the WIAA are examples of the power that the Trump administration is trying to exert on policies at all levels, “using their platform in a calculated, chaotic, and hateful way.”

“There is so much a federal administration cannot do, but let’s be real here, this administration is trying to govern by executive overreach, and although I do not think they will succeed in changing many federal laws, there is power in their federal agencies and also in their significant use of the very loud microphone at their disposal,” Swetz said.

The anti-trans orders “will undoubtedly create a chilling effect of pre-compliance,” Swetz added. “We cannot allow obedience in advance, although we’re already seeing it; the WIAA ruling is a disappointing example of pre-compliance, and it’s frankly antithetical to the values WIAA espouses.”

Gender-affirming care for minors

Another bill — coauthored by Sen. Cory Tomczyk (R-Mosinee), Rep. Scott Allen (R-Waukesha), Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) — would ban gender- affirming care for people under the age of 18. It would prohibit health care providers from engaging in or making referrals for medical intervention “if done for the purpose of changing the minor’s body to correspond to a sex that is discordant with the minor’s biological sex,” including prescribing puberty-blocking drugs or gender-affirming surgery for minors.

“Our children are not experiments and parents should not be scared or pressured into having their children receive non-medically necessary drugs or irreversible procedures before their brains are fully developed,” the authors wrote in a memo. 

Health care providers under the bill could be investigated and have their licenses revoked by the Board of Nursing, the Medical Examining Board and the Physician Assistant Affiliated Credentialing Board if there are allegations that they have provided this type of care to a minor.

Following an executive order by Trump to withhold funds from medical institutions that provide gender affirming care and to require federal health programs to exclude coverage of gender-affirming surgeries and hormone treatments for young people by 2026, Children’s Wisconsin hospital paused gender-affirming care for teens. The hospital reinstated the practice.

Spreitzer called the bill the “cruelest” of the proposals. 

“Republicans are touting this idea that kids shouldn’t make permanent medical decisions until they’re 18,” Spreitzer said. “There are plenty of permanent medical decisions that need to be made before the age of 18 because of different conditions, and that’s why doctors exist.”

He added that such decisions “should be made between doctors, parents and the affected young people, based on medical necessity, based on rigorous medical evaluation, and politicians should not be inserting themselves into that.”

Spreitzer said that medications to delay puberty are intended to give young people the chance to grow up and potentially be able to make additional medical decisions once they turn 18. He said that banning them could create significant psychological harm and leave permanent physical effects that may require additional medical interventions in the future that wouldn’t have been necessary if they’ve been able to take puberty blockers. 

The process for gender affirming care is lengthy and is a decision that includes the child, their families and health providers, including mental health providers, and gender affirming care before 18 mostly focuses on pubertal suppression or hormone therapy.

Studies have found that de-transitioning is quite rare, according to the Human Rights Campaign, and one study found that transgender youth who start hormones with their parents’ assistance before age 18 years are less likely to detransition compared with those that start as adults.

Spreitzer noted that those under 18 who have been receiving care would also have to stop receiving it. The bill would include a six-month period before it goes into effect which would be meant for health care providers to discontinue care for minor patients 

“People are going to essentially be told in six months you’re going to have to stop taking medications you’re currently on, and you’re going to have to go through puberty as a sex that you don’t identify with. That is going to create incredible trauma for those young people,” Spreitzer said.

Names and pronouns

The fourth bill introduced last week would require school districts to implement policies stating that parents determine the names and pronouns used by school staff. The proposed policies must require a parent’s written authorization for school employees to use something different. 

The bill includes an exception if a nickname is a shortened version of a student’s legal first or middle name.

Bill authors Dittrich and Sen. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken) said the legislation is in response to parents feeling like schools are excluding them. The bill was modeled after a policy implemented by Arrowhead High School in 2022, even as there was some pushback from students and families.

“Its intent is not to punish children or eliminate their ‘safe spaces,’” the bill authors wrote in a memo. “Instead, the goal is to ensure transparency and prevent school district employees from withholding or, in some cases, encouraging life-changing decisions regarding a child’s sexuality or gender identity without parental involvement.” 

Spreitzer said the bill was poorly drafted. Besides “making it just harder for trans students to be called by the name and pronouns that they use in everyday life, it would really put school districts in a ridiculous position,” he said. 

“People go by all sorts of nicknames in everyday life — maybe it’s a version of their last name, maybe it’s a totally different name. It’s not as simple as just a shortened version of your first or middle name for everybody,” Spretizer said. “This is the Legislature trying to micromanage decisions that are made in everyday life without great controversy, and inserting itself into every school district, and I think it just would have absolutely absurd effects that the authors have not even thought of.” 

Spreitzer said bills targeting transgender youth are not particularly new in Wisconsin. He noted that in 2011 a bill that would have restricted bathroom use for transgender people was introduced, but it never got to then-Gov. Scott Walker’s desk. 

“It’s obviously become more front and center, just seeing how early in the legislative session these are being put out, and how much of coordinated effort there seems to be with bills coming out three different days this week, all attacking trans people,” Spreitzer said. 

Spreitzer said that even in the current national political environment, advocates opposed to such legislation are in a stronger position than in the past. Gov. Tony Evers has vetoed similar legislation in the past and has pledged to continue vetoing such legislation, he noted. The Legislature’s LGBTQ+ caucus has a record number of members this year — 12 lawmakers from across the state including Eau Claire, Appleton, Ashland and Green Bay.

“While we are deeply concerned about what’s coming down from Washington DC, we are in a very strong position to not only stop attacks on the LGBTQ+ community here in Wisconsin, but hopefully in two years, to be in a majority and be able to pass proactive legislation and protect equality,” Spreitzer said.

Swetz told the Wisconsin Examiner that FAIR Wisconsin will continue working with local, state and federal elected officials to strengthen protections for LGTBQ+ people. 

“I think fear is understandable. There is a lot that’s uncertain. I’m scared, too. I also think we have to remember that the LGBTQ+ community has always faced hostility, often from the government, and we are still here,” Swetz wrote. “This is a moment to organize and mobilize and most importantly, to take care of ourselves and our community.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Milwaukee Pastor Mariano Garcia prays before Supreme Court candidate Brad Schimel's Hispanic roundtable. (Photo by Henry Redman/Wisconsin Examiner)

Ahead of a campaign event targeting Latino voters at the Wisconsin Republican Party’s Hispanic outreach center on Milwaukee’s south side on Thursday afternoon, a few dozen protesters gathered on the street outside the venue. Carrying an eight-foot effigy of Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, the protesters chanted  about Elon Musk’s campaign expenditures to help Schimel win an open seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court and the about the vote by Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives to pass a budget that includes cuts to federal programs like Medicaid. 

Inside, a group of members of the right-wing John Birch Society — most famous for conspiracy theories and anti-communist crusades in the 1960s and ’70s — made fun of the protesters and questioned the validity of their beliefs. 

“They’re paid, that’s organized as hell,” one woman said. “If you’re gonna protest, protest something that’s legit.” 

Schimel, who served as Wisconsin’s Republican state attorney general from 2015-19, has run his campaign for the Court by attacking the body’s current liberal majority — saying that the group is legislating from the bench and specifically calling out Justice Janet Protasiewicz’s successful 2023 campaign for making “open promises on the campaign trail.”

In her campaign, Protasiewicz said she personally believes in women’s right to access abortion but said her beliefs would not influence how she would rule on legal questions in abortion-related cases. 

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported Friday that Schimel said in a radio interview last year, after the Court heard arguments over the validity of Wisconsin’s 1849 law that has been interpreted as a blanket ban on abortion, that the Court’s majority, all women, were “driven by their emotions” while hearing the case. 

In a press release Friday, the Schimel campaign said he would restore the Court’s “impartiality” if elected. 

On the campaign trail, Schimel often compares the Supreme Court to a baseball umpire, saying Brewers fans would be frustrated if they sat down for a game with their “$17 beer” and the home plate umpire came out wearing a St. Louis Cardinals jersey. 

“You’re not going to stick around and buy another expensive beer, because you know how this game’s going to end. Why bother?” Schimel said at the Thursday event. “Litigants should not come to court knowing they’ve lost their case before they even uttered a word based on the identity of the judge that’s going to hear it. It’s not how it should work.” 

But at Schimel’s “Hispanic roundtable” Thursday, the state Republican Party was fully engaged. Republican Party of Wisconsin Executive Director Brian Schimming and former Republican candidate for attorney general Eric Toney were in attendance, rubbing elbows with the John Birch Society members. 

“Because people in this state and people in this city and people on the South Side need somebody who’s gonna have them top of mind and protecting victims and doing the right thing, stand up for the rule of law, all the things that we all want,” Schimming said. “And you would expect that would be easier for people to do, but it really takes somebody of great courage, somebody who’s honest and somebody who’s forthright, to step up at times like this.”

One attendee, filming Schimel’s remarks, wore #LoomersArmy hat, merch that can be purchased on the website of the Laura Loomer Fan Club. Loomer is a right-wing media personality and activist whom U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene has called “extremely racist.” 

Schimel was introduced at the event by Marty Calderon and Mariano Garcia, two pastors on Milwaukee’s South Side who have been involved in the creation of the Republican Party’s office in the neighborhood. 

In his opening prayer, Garcia criticized Black, Hispanic and LGBTQ people.

“Black people, there are some Black people here. I’m a preacher so I can say this: Black people have worshiped at the altar of color and race for a long time,” Garcia said. “And LGBTQ, because when Obama put out those colors, a bunch of pastors turned and we shouldn’t do that. We should stand with righteousness and for God, for his word, for holiness. Amen. And Hispanics, they worship at the altar of immigration. And that is an issue … this is about law and order. Right now, even people who are illegal are against illegal immigration because what is happening is not the same thing. There is an onslaught, an invasion, there is something that all of us can unite against. Because this is endangering all of our communities. Amen.” 

Garcia said Schimel plans to visit Garcia’s church on Sunday. After the event, Schimel told reporters his Christian faith helps him remain objective. 

“I don’t begin my day doing public service without prayer every day without fail, because there are such huge impacts you can have on people’s lives, and I’m hoping for the wisdom to know how to do that, right?” he said. “But it also affects another way, as people stand in front of me, I see in everybody that stands there a dignity that comes from God for them, in them, and therefore that helps with that being objective. And I don’t view them how they look, how they appear, how they talk, how much money they have. They’re equal under the law. So that is something that my faith drives in me and how I deal with other human beings.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The rally in the rotunda of the Wisconsin State Capitol was a chance for speakers to share their experiences of going to referendum. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner.

Prentice School District, a rural district in the northern part of Wisconsin, will ask voters on April 1 to raise their property taxes and provide the district $3.5 million over the next four years for operational costs. It’s one of the smaller requests among the over 80 ballot measures — totaling $1.6 billion in requests — that will go before voters across the state next month.

Denae Walcisak, a member of a team campaigning to pass the referendum, drove three and a half hours from the Northwoods to attend a Friday rally at the Capitol organized by the Wisconsin Public Education Network (WPEN). She spoke about her district’s third time trying for a yes and described the lengths community members are going to for students in her district.

Her dad, who is a school board member, put off knee surgery for almost a year, Walcisak said, while he donated his time and money to fill in as a school bus driver in the rural district and to transport students to field trips and games. 

“Teacher organizes fundraisers for the art club to pay for basic supplies… Our band teacher also teaches sixth grade reading. We have a part-time elementary gym teacher who is 82 years young. Our tech ed teacher bought a welding machine for his students with his own money… My son needs speech therapy. The school has tried twice to hire this year, but who wants to take a job at a school whose future is uncertain?” Walcisak said. 

Even with the funding from the referendum, Walcisak said the district will continue to just scrape by. She called for more funding from the state. 

“The lack of funding is affecting our whole community and our way of life. I ask you from the people of Prentice, please don’t let us fade away,” she said. 

The rally marked the end of Public Schools Week, an annual recognition of Wisconsin’s public schools and a time advocates use to call for supporting and investing. Gov. Tony Evers issued a declaration on Monday reminding Wisconsinites that public education is a right and that public schools need support and investment from elected officials. 

The rally in the rotunda of the Wisconsin State Capitol was a chance for speakers to share their experiences of going to referendum — the stress of repeatedly asking for them and consequences of failure — and to call for the state to make greater investments in schools. 

WPEN Executive Director Heather DuBois Bourenane said the use of school referendums is an “overwhelming,” “expensive” and “incredibly disequalizing” way of funding schools. A scroll with the names of every school district that has gone to referendum since the last state budget was rolled out and suspended from the third floor of the building, reaching down to the ground floor.

“Not all of these referenda passed… Some of them had to go more than once, and still didn’t pass. Some of them had to go again and again and keep asking for less,” DuBois Bourenane said. “When we fund our schools like this, our gaps get wider and wider.” 

State Superintendent Jill Underly, who is running for a second term in office against school choice advocate Brittany Kinser, said the underfunding of Wisconsin’s schools has reached a “critical point.”

“With the next state biennial budget, we have a chance — a real chance — to finally catch your school districts up and to give them what they need to thrive,” Underly said. 

The pleas from rallygoers come as the budget writing process picks up in the state Capitol. Evers introduced a state budget proposal last month that would invest an additional $3 billion in K-12 education, and Republican lawmakers, who have said Evers’ proposal costs too much and therefore isn’t serious, are preparing to write their own version. 

Jeff Pressley and Joni Anderson, members of the Adams-Friendship School Board, and Tom Wermuth, the district’s school administrator, spoke to the repetitive and divisive nature of the school referendum process.

“We’re on the treadmill for referendum endlessly. We live literally paycheck to paycheck or referendum to referendum,” Pressley said, adding that the state’s funding formula is the problem with school funding.

The state’s complex school funding formula takes into account a combination of state, federal, and local aid. Of the funding, local property taxes and state aid are the two largest sources of revenue for schools, but school districts are restricted in how much they can bring in by state revenue limits. 

Revenue limits were adjusted for inflation until 2010 and since then, lawmakers have only sometimes provided increases. Currently, school districts receive a $325 increase annually in their per pupil revenue limits. 

Referendums are a way for districts to exceed their revenue limits, and schools have begun relying on them increasingly to meet costs. Last year, a record number of school districts went to referendum. 

“The funding formula in the state of Wisconsin worked significantly better from 1993 to 2010. During that time period, school districts were provided inflationary increases to the revenue limit…” Wermuth said. “Right now, we’re operating on a $3 million a year referendum. We’re in the second year of a four-year, non-recurring referendum… even with our referendum, we’re about $1.2 million dollars behind inflation. Like most districts, we can’t get off that treadmill.” 

Pressley said lawmakers have made school boards and districts the “villain” by forcing districts to have to go to voters to meet costs. 

“We have a lot of retired people on fixed incomes. Almost 50% of our funding for our schools comes from local property taxes. So, who’s the bad guy? It’s not the people in this building, it’s the people at the school district because you raised our taxes,” Pressley said. 

Wermuth said he practically isn’t an educational leader anymore. 

“I am a financial expert. I study spreadsheets and cannot get off selling referendums to the public,” Wermuth said. He added that the process is “incredibly divisive” and that “at some point in time, the tolerance is just not going to be. It’s not going to exist, regardless of what we try to do.” 

Freshman Rep. Angelina Cruz (D-Racine) said that the problems facing school districts aren’t “unsolvable.” She said the state’s estimated $4 billion budget surplus could be used to help fund school districts, that the state could tax its wealthier residents to help afford costs and stop funding private school vouchers at the expense of public schools. She said that the recent budget proposal from Gov. Tony Evers was a good starting point as it includes raising the special education reimbursement to 60%, increasing per-pupil revenue and investing in student mental health services, universal free school meals and literacy education. 

Cruz called on people to continue to speak up for better school investments — even as Republican lawmakers are likely to throw out all of Evers’ proposals. 

“There is an appetite to fully fund our schools, and when the proposal comes back to not do that, you need to continue to show up, and use your voices to advocate for our kids,” Cruz said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Sunrise over Orizaba, Mexico, seen from the Cerro del Borrego nature preserve. | Photo by Mercedes Falk. Courtesy Puentes/Bridges

In Tlaquilpa, a mountain village in the clouds, women wearing long skirts and colorful blouses walked to mass. Outside a colonial church with bright orange and yellow walls, a crowd of people holding Baby Jesus dolls celebrated Candelaria, the February holiday that combines Catholic and pre-Hispanic traditions, marking the end of the Christmas season and the beginning of spring.

Shuan Duvall, a retired Spanish teacher from Alma, Wisconsin, and her husband Jamie, a retired judge, rolled past the church on Feb. 2 with a truckload of other U.S. visitors and stopped in front of a small restaurant. The owners, Maximino Sanchez and Gabina Cuaquehua, have two sons in Minnesota, who’ve been away from home for more than 20 years. Shaun got to know the sons when she was working as a translator on dairy farms in western Wisconsin and Minnesota. Later, she and Jamie became godparents to their U.S.-born children. 

Sanchez and Caquehua greeted the Duvalls in their living area downstairs from the restaurant and performed an impromptu ceremony, lighting incense and hanging flower leis around the Duvalls’ necks while reciting prayers.

“We thank you because you are like second parents for my grandchildren,” Cuaquehua said. “You help them and accompany them on the path of life.”

“I ask that over there you take care of our children as if you were their parents,” said Sanchez. “You’re there in person, not like a video call or a cellphone call, which isn’t the same.”

The Duvalls were surprised and moved, still wearing the flower leis around their necks and wiping tears from their eyes when they met up with the rest of the group outside the restaurant.

Shaun Duvall described the experience as an honor. By becoming a godparent to the family’s children, she said, she hoped to honor them, too, for “all the things they go through, the struggles and sacrifices and also the joy, because there is real joy.”

The same motivating idea drives Puentes/Bridges, the nonprofit she started while working as a translator, to help build cultural understanding between Midwestern dairy farmers and the families of their Mexican workers.

Duvall has helped a lot of people, fostering better communication and better relationships between farmers and the immigrants they employ, connecting workers with medical care and helping them get away from abusive bosses and partners, and sharing her appreciation of the people of Mexico with a whole generation of Midwesterners who have had life-changing experiences going on the trips she organized for two decades, before she retired a few years ago from the organization she founded.

“I don’t think what I did was that big. I helped people out when they needed help – who wouldn’t do that?” she said. “It’s some kind of connection that goes beyond helping people — [to say] you are a treasured, precious person in my life.”

That spirit of warmth on Duvall’s part, and on the part of Mexican families who’ve put their trust in her and in the Midwestern dairy farmers who employ their loved ones, shines like a beacon in our current political moment, when the ostentatious cruelty of the Trump administration threatens to stomp out the quiet virtues of compassion and human connection.

The most remarkable thing about the relationship between Midwestern dairy farmers and the Mexican immigrants who work on their farms is not the economic ties that bind these two groups of rural people, or the astounding amount of money the workers contribute to the economies of both Mexico and the U.S. Instead, it’s the realization that getting to know and care for each other can transform and enrich our lives. 

Carrie Schiltz has had that transformative experience. Her Lutheran congregation in Rushford, Minnesota helped put Octavio Flores — a relative of the same family that honored the Duvalls — through forestry school. Schiltz learned of Flores through his sister, who is a member of her congregation, which has made it a mission to build relationships with immigrants in the area. 

During the Puentes/Bridges trip, Flores shared what he’d learned with Schiltz and the rest of the group, taking them to see the dramatic Cascada de Atlahuitzia waterfall and explaining his work on a project to restore biodiversity in the national park around the Pico de Orizaba volcano and with the Sembrando Vida program, a reforestation effort through which the Mexican government pays farmers to plant trees and preserve local plant species.

Part of the goal of Sembrando Vida (“sowing life”) is to help people in rural areas stay in Mexico, instead of migrating to the U.S. to support their families.

Mexican economist Luis Rey says there is a need for more such efforts to to help keep Mexican families together. “There is no value, in Western economics, placed on the grief of a mother whose children go to the U.S. to work and leave her alone. Her loss means nothing in mainstream economic terms.” Rey, who teaches at the University of Oaxaca, has students from rural villages who work on projects to preserve local culture in their communities, including recording local, indigenous songs and dances in order to preserve them. That form of cultural wealth and community cohesion should be valued as much as monetary earnings, he believes. But staying in your village in Mexico can also mean living in poverty. 

One of Rey’s students worked to convert an abandoned building in his town into an arts center, where he offered music lessons. The community center he created was a triumph, giving local musicians, dancers and artists a place to share and pass on their art. For his final project, the student gave a performance, Rey recalled, “And I noticed he had used a black marker to color in his socks so no one would notice the holes in his shoes.” 

José Tlaxcala, a builder who worked in Oregon framing houses for several years, returning to Mexico after he injured his spine, said something nagged at him from his time working in the U.S. “When I was helping to clean out and demolish houses in Oregon, three times we cleaned out houses where elderly people lived, and they died horribly, all alone. The houses were full of garbage, alcohol bottles, rotten food. That’s not how I thought people ended their lives in the U.S. I think of people there having a higher standard of living. But the young people had moved away and left these older adults, who died all alone in horrible conditions. Here, older people live with their families. What do you think about that?”

There is no one right answer to the question of how to live a good life. But the hollow triumphalism of the current president of the richest nation on Earth, proclaiming the supremacy of wealth and power by terrorizing immigrants and threatening to inflict maximum suffering on the most powerless people among us is a sure sign that we have lost our way.

In her many years of work building bonds between rural people in the U.S. and Mexico, Duvall has come to see the human relationships she’s watched develop as “sacred” — although she feels a bit self-conscious about using that word.

“Mexican traditional culture can be deeply sacred,” she said, reflecting on the moving ceremony binding her to the grandparents of her Mexican godchildren. “Those bonds are so important — way more important than money.” But there is also plenty of cruelty to be found in Mexico, she added. It’s a profoundly unequal society. The U.S. is quickly moving in the same direction.

People everywhere have the capacity for both good and evil, Duvall said. “Maybe the challenge in life is to really emphasize the sacred aspects of ourselves, so we can kind of evolve away from the cruelty.”

This story is Part Four in a four-part series. Read Part One: Amid Trump’s threats to deport workers, Wisconsin dairy farmers travel to Mexico Part Two: A deceased farmworker’s son finally returns to Mexico to meet his father’s family and Part Three: Deportation threats give people pause, but not for long, Mexican workers say

After a homeless woman died in the Eau Claire County Jail more than a year ago, Wisconsin DOJ has yet to release a report | Getty Images

Silver O. Jenkins, 29, a homeless woman, was found unresponsive in the Eau Claire County Jail on March 12, 2023. The investigation of her death was completed in August 2023 but has not been released pending a Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) review.

It is not clear why the DOJ has taken more than a year to review the death investigation and release it to the public.

In July 2024, the Wisconsin Examiner made a record request of the death investigation to the St. Croix County Sheriff’s Office, the authority charged with conducting the investigation. Sheriff Scott Knudson noted the death investigation had been completed in August 2023 and had been passed on to the Eau Claire Sheriff’s Office, but he was uncertain when the DOJ obtained it.

The completed investigation was not released to the Examiner, because, Knudson said, the DOJ’s review outweighed the public interest in having the investigation released.

Knudson said there was a “balancing test” of “public interest” versus “integrity of the legal system” to “…allow the Department of Justice ample time to make a determination related to the investigation prior to the records being disclosed to the public.”

He added, “Public policy favors public safety and effective law enforcement, which is supported by the decision to deny your request at this time until the Department of Justice has completed their review of the investigation.”

In August 2024, the Examiner submitted another record request to the St. Croix County Sheriff’s Office for two items:

• All powerpoint presentations produced by the St. Croix County Sheriff’s Office which, during 2023 or 2024, were shared with and/or presented to personnel from any Wisconsin District Attorney’s Office and/or the state Department of Justice (DOJ), and which mention or are related to the March 12th, 2023, in-custody death of Silver O. Jenkins at the Eau Claire County Jail. 
• Any jail security camera footage relevant to the sheriff’s investigation into Silver’s death.

Like the July 2024 request, Sheriff Knudson denied the August 2024 record request based on the same justification he offered in July 2024.

In January 2025, the Examiner contacted Eau Claire County Medical Examiner Marcie Rosas for a copy of Jenkins’ autopsy report. Rosas responded via phone that the report would not be released pending the ongoing DOJ review.

Based on a July 15, 2024 email exchange between the St. Croix Sheriff’s Office and the DOJ, in July 2024, it appeared then that the DOJ review was coming to a close. The email exchange was between St. Croix County Sheriff Captain Tim Kufus and DOJ Assistant Attorney General James Kraus.

“Requests for reports are continuing to come in, when can we expect a decision from your office? We would like to fulfill the requests,” Kufus wrote about record requests on the Jenkins death investigation to Kraus.

Kraus responded, “Now that we have the policies, I hope to complete my part of the case by the end of this month (July 2024).”

Subsequently, the Examiner has submitted several email requests to the DOJ on the review status, but there has been no reply.

On March 14, 2023, the Eau Claire Sheriff’s Office put out a press release about Jenkins’ death and noted that she was “…listed as homeless, was charged on February 10 for disorderly conduct and bail jumping,” and added that she was in jail on $500 cash bond and had made her first appearance in court on Feb.14.

Court records also reveal that Jenkins had also been charged with bail-jumping, a misdemeanor and that Jenkins was supposed to have a competency hearing on March 7, but on March 6, that appears to have been changed to March 16, four days after she died.

Jenkins was also cited for trespassing, disorderly conduct, and bail jumping on Jan. 31, 2023.

From 2019-2023, Silvers had been charged with several violations in Eau Claire County, mostly misdemeanors.

Circuit court records from Eau Claire County show Silver’s address as “homeless,” however earlier court records from Racine and Kenosha counties cite her address as either 618 S. Barstow Street in Eau Claire, the site of The Sojourner House, a Catholic Charities homeless shelter, or 211 Howard Avenue in Racine, an apartment building.

The Examiner has contacted Catholic Charities and other homeless shelters in Eau Claire for anyone who knew Jenkins, but so far, there have been no responses.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Brad Schimel speaks with reporters after an event Feb. 26. (Henry Redman | Wisconsin Examiner)

At an event hosted at Marquette University earlier this month, a member of the audience told Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, the conservative candidate for state Supreme Court, that she was “a bit afraid” of him being elected. 

The woman said she’d been sexually assaulted when she was 19 and was grateful that at the time she was able to “control whether my body and life were upended with an unwanted pregnancy.” 

Throughout the campaign, Schimel, a former Republican state attorney general, has been attacked for his position on the legality of abortion — an issue that is likely to come before the Court after the election on April 1. 

A  currently pending case before the Court will determine the validity of an 1849 law that conservatives say bans abortion in the state. The ban is now on hold after a circuit court judge said it doesn’t apply to medical abortions, but at an event last summer, Schimel said he supports the idea that the 1849 law bans abortion. 

When abortion comes up during the campaign, Schimel acknowledges his own anti-abortion views, which he says are informed in part by becoming an adoptive father to two daughters, but he says the issue should be decided by Wisconsin’s voters, not a judge.

“Because of our circumstances, we treasure life even when it’s not planned,” he told reporters Wednesday. “But judges don’t make the law. This decision belongs in the hands of the voters, and I will respect the will of the voters of Wisconsin, period. When I put on the robe my personal opinions no longer matter.” 

At some campaign events, Schimel has said the voters should decide the issue through a referendum, but Wisconsin doesn’t have a process that allows its voters to change state law through referenda. The only route is through the constitutional amendment process, which requires a proposal to be passed in two consecutive legislative sessions before going to the ballot. 

More than once — including in his budget proposal this year —Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has pushed the Legislature to a referendum process that would allow voters to weigh in on abortion. Republicans in control of the Legislature have stymied that effort. 

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court election is set to break campaign finance records. In the 2023 race, the most expensive so far at the time, liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz defeated conservative Dan Kelly to clinch a 4-3 liberal majority on the Court. That race generated about $50 million in spending. Experts say this year’s election could top $70 million in campaign spending. 

Both Schimel and his opponent, Dane County Judge Susan Crawford, have received support from billionaire political donors. Crawford has gotten donations from George Soros and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker while Schimel has gotten support from Beloit billionaire Diane Hendricks, Illinois billionaire Liz Uihlein and millions in outside support from Elon Musk. 

“It’s going to be worse,” Schimel said about the influx of money at the Wisconsin Counties Association conference Wednesday morning. 

The winner will decide the ideological tilt of a Court that, in addition to abortion rights, is likely to hear cases on the fate of Wisconsin’s congressional maps, the role of state government in regulating polluters and the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches. 

But Schimel, a career Republican official, told the audience of county government officials Wednesday that politics are irrelevant. 

“One of the best things about being a judge is there aren’t politics,” he said. 

He decided to run because he disapproved of the campaign rhetoric in the 2023 race, he told the county officials.

At the Marquette event earlier this month, Schimel said there’s a difference between a judicial conservative and a political conservative and that he’s an “originalist.” 

“You interpret law when you have to, but you apply the law as it’s written,” he said. “When there are ambiguities in the law, well, now you’re going to be forced to try to interpret the meaning of the ambiguity, but you try to stay as faithful as possible to the intent of the Legislature.” 

“I’m also an originalist when it comes to the Constitution and the amendments,” he continued. “That they’re to be viewed in terms of the perspective of those that ratified the document or the amendments.” 

Schimel’s exposition of his judicial philosophy has shifted when he speaks to different audiences. 

Speaking to law students and Milwaukee voters at the Marquette event, when asked about federal judges’ role in thwarting Trump’s executive orders to end birthright citizenship, give Musk access to massive troves of personal data and stop congressionally appropriated funds from being disbursed, Schimel said it’s a judge’s role to define the limits of executive authority. 

“When there’s a dispute about whether that exercise of power is legitimate or not, well, then it may have to be the court that resolves that dispute,” he said. 

However, in a radio appearance with right wing host Vicki McKenna, he accused federal judges of “acting corruptly” for issuing temporary restraining orders against the dismantling of federal agencies.

The April election will be one of the first tests nationwide of the voting public’s mood after Trump was sworn in last month, Musk began his work, the White House attempted to freeze all federal spending and Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass a budget that includes massive cuts for programs such as Medicaid. 

In recent years, Democrats and liberal candidates have performed better in off-cycle elections, midterms and special elections when the electorate is made up of more highly engaged voters. At the WCA event, Schimel acknowledged he knows he needs to do a lot to re-engage the coalition of voters that narrowly swung the state for Trump in November. 

“3.4 million people turned out for Nov. 5,” he said. “If we get 2 million for April 1, that’s going to be a huge, huge turnout. Well, that means about a million and a half will fall off and don’t come and vote again. I need to convince those voters that this is important.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Rep. Robin Vos and Sen. Julian Bradley testified on a bill to verify the immigration status of people being held for a felony charge. Screenshot via WisEye.

Republican lawmakers argued Wednesday that the state needs to require local law enforcement to report people with felony charges to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) if they can’t verify citizenship as a way to support public safety.

Proposed legislation would require local sheriffs to verify the citizenship status of people in custody for a felony offense and notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) if citizenship cannot be verified. It would also require sheriffs to comply with detainers and administrative warrants received from the federal Department of Homeland Security for people held in the county jail for a criminal offense. It comes as President Donald Trump and his administration have started to ramp up deportation of migrants in the U.S. without legal authorization and taken other steps to restrict U.S. immigration. 

Sen. Julian Bradley (R-New Berlin) and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) emphasized during Assembly Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee hearing that their bill, AB 24, would only apply in cases of felony offenses.

“This seems to get dragged into a lot of other immigration policy, but I want to repeat individuals who are here illegally who commit felonies,” Bradley said. 

“Let’s be clear again. This proposal will make it easier to remove dangerous criminals from our communities,” Bradley said. “It’s shocking to think that a handful in law enforcement and our government would rather protect felons than work with our federal partners to stop the flow of crime and drugs into our neighborhoods.”  He added that he hoped to see bipartisan support for the bill. 

The lawmakers said  counties that don’t comply with ICE are putting other counties at risk.

Vos brought up a 2024 arrest by Prairie du Chien police of a Venezuelan immigrant who they said was affiliated with a gang and was charged with assaulting a mother and daughter. Republicans have repeatedly used the case to make political points about immigration.

“Prior to his arrest in Wisconsin, he was arrested in Minneapolis on suspicion of vehicle theft, he was booked into the Hennepin County Jail and soon released. Hennepin County, unfortunately, is listed as a non-cooperative facility,” Vos said. “Prompt ICE notification could have prevented this terrible crime from occurring right here in Wisconsin.”

A 2024 ICE report lists Dane and Milwaukee counties as “noncooperative institutions” in Wisconsin. Seven counties in the state currently have formal agreements with ICE to hold in jail immigrants without legal status. There were eight at one point, but Lafayette County ended its participation in ICE’s 287(g) program.

Under the bill, the county of a sheriff who does not comply would lose 15% of its shared revenue payments from the state in the next year. Compliance would need to be certified each year with the Wisconsin Department of Revenue.

Rep. Tip McGuire (D-Kenosha) questioned why an additional mandate on local law enforcement was necessary and pointed out the potential financial impact the bill could have on local officials. The financial impact to counties was pointed out as a concern in written testimony provided by Badger State Sheriffs’ Association. 

“Law enforcement already has the opportunity to allocate their resources as they need,” McGuire said. “That’s why we elect sheriffs. We want to put them in a position so they can make those determinations for their local community, and instead we’re mandating that they comply with the federal government in this case, and we don’t really know what the local circumstances are.”

County governments are “already struggling with challenges and staffing and their financial circumstances, and then we threaten to harm them financially if they don’t [comply],” he added. “What are we gaining?”

Public safety, Bradley answered,  adding that as long as sheriffs don’t “do what Milwaukee and Dane County are doing” then they “don’t have to worry about the claw back.” 

Vos justified the penalty with a reference to the long delay by Milwaukee Public Schools in placing 25 police officers in schools required by the 2023 state shared revenue law. He said not including a penalty in that legislation was a “mistake.” 

“If you want to enforce it, then there has to be a penalty,” Vos said. 

The bill lists fifteen documents that could be used to verify the status of a person arrested, including a U.S. passport, a birth record issued by a state in the US that bears an official seal or other mark of authentication, a certificate of naturalization and U.S. citizenship or a permanent resident card.

Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire) asked how quickly someone would have to produce the necessary records. 

“It’s people who are accused of a crime and not convicted,” Emerson said. “Because not everybody carries every single piece of paperwork and certainly not a notarized copy of a birth certificate around with them.”

Bradley said the bill would leave it up to the discretion of law enforcement but added he would be open to debating changes.

Emerson also asked if any consideration had been given to cases where a felony charge is potentially downgraded to a lesser charge. 

The authors said that the bill doesn’t consider that. 

“The people have already committed a crime by coming into the country illegally,” Vos said — although being in the U.S. without authorization is not a criminal offense in all cases.

 “The second crime that they would be committing would be potentially a violent felony,” Vos said. “All we’re saying is you have to notify ICE and then at that point ICE will give them all the opportunity to prove they are here legally. There is no problem with that, but that’s not really the responsibility of the citizens of Wisconsin.”

Under federal law, entering the U.S. without the approval of an immigration officer is a misdemeanor offense that carries fines and no more than six months in prison. However, in a significant number of cases, such as when someone enters the country legally and overstays a visa, it is just a civil violation.

Racine County District Attorney Patricia Hanson told lawmakers the bill is necessary to address political and policy barriers between Wisconsin’s 72 counties and to enable federal, state and local enforcement agencies to enhance safety. 

“This change in no way affects hard-working, undocumented people who may come to our jail for driving without a license. It will not even affect undocumented people who commit petty theft, who lie to the police about their identity, abuse their spouse with minor injuries, or drive drunk or impaired up to the third offense. None of those are felonies in Wisconsin,” Hanson said. “One could even argue under some of these circumstances this bill is not far enough, but it is a good start.”

Witnesses testifying against the bill said it could create fear in communities and discourage people from reporting crimes. 

Alondra Garcia, who said she is a visa holder, former DACA recipient and current Milwaukee Public Schools educator, said recent anti-immigrant rhetoric since Trump took office has been “disheartening” and “dehumanizing.”

The bill, she said, “would allow racial profiling to be acceptable in our community.”

“Immigrants, including those with legal status, will fear interaction with law enforcement, making them less likely to report crimes or seek help when needed. It will separate families and destabilize communities,” Garcia said. “Families will live in fear that a routine traffic stop or minor interaction with law enforcement could lead to detention and deportation.” 

Two groups — the Wisconsin Sheriffs and Deputy Sheriffs Association and Badger State Sheriffs’ Association — are registered in favor of the bill, according to the state’s lobbying website. Several groups are registered against the bill, including the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin Inc, Kids Forward, Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Wisconsin Council of Churches, Wisconsin Counties Association and the Wisconsin Education Association Council.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A teacher and students in a classroom. (Klaus Vedfelt | Getty Images)

An audit announced this week of changes in recent state testing standards is the latest reaction of Republican lawmakers to changes the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) approved last year in the names and cut scores for achievement levels. It also comes as state Superintendent Jill Underly campaigns for reelection facing a challenger criticizing DPI for “lowering” state standards.

Co-Chairs of Wisconsin Legislative Joint Audit Committee Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto) and Rep. Robert Wittke (R-Caledonia) announced the audit Tuesday of DPI’s decision to update terms describing achievement levels and revise the cut scores used to measure student achievement. 

Underly and DPI have repeatedly defended the changes as part of the agency’s regular process to ensure standards are kept current. Assembly Republicans passed a bill last week that would reverse the changes, requiring  the state to reinstate standards set in the 2019-20 school year and tie changes to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). NAEP is a nationwide assessment meant to provide representative data about student achievement. 

Wimberger and Wittke noted in a statement that the recent NAEP results found that 31% of fourth grade students were at or above proficient in reading. Under the new state testing standards, Wisconsin had a proficiency rate of 48% in English/Language Arts and 49% in math. The legislators accused Underly of trying to hide the state’s literacy challenges.

The “unilateral changes to cover up DPI’s failing is absolutely unacceptable, and this audit will help us uncover exactly how and why these reporting standards were changed to stop future manipulation,” the lawmakers said.

According to the Legislative Audit Bureau, the audit could look at several topics related to the changes, including DPI’s written policies and procedures for developing the state’s annual school report card and for updating assessment cut scores. Other topics include, whether the current policies comply with statutory and administrative rule requirements, the way the agency gets input from educators and parents when developing changes, and how the process used for the recent changes versus previous years, State Auditor Joe Chrisman wrote in a memo to Wimberger and Wittke.

Deputy Superintendent Tom McCarthy said in a statement that the audit was for political purposes, noting the upcoming state superintendent election.

“Our approach has been transparent. If the Legislature were genuinely interested in this issue, and had listened to our testimony just a few weeks ago, they would understand that updating cut scores is a standard procedure whenever updates are made to our rigorous state standards,” McCarthy said. 

During a hearing on the bill to reverse the changes, McCarthy and other DPI representatives laid out the process the agency used, including a survey and consulting education experts to discuss potential changes and come up with recommendations. 

In his statement, McCarthy reiterated that the updates were recommended by experts and that  NAEP is a “national benchmarking tool” not a state accountability tool. The test is typically taken by only  a few thousand students in the state to develop a representative pool.

“It does not measure Wisconsin academic standards, which are used by teachers to deliver instruction. Comparing the two is like trying to use a thermometer to measure the length of a two-by-four — it makes no sense,” McCarthy said. “Especially since it seems NAEP is under attack by the White House, including canceling a major NAEP assessment and firing analytic staff.”

The Trump administration recently put NAEP Chief Peggy Carr on administrative leave. The Department of Education also recently canceled the NAEP Long-Term Trend exam, which measures the math and reading skills for 17-year-olds. 

McCarthy said DPI learned about the audit from a press release that “falsely states that the DPI didn’t support literacy reform.”

“Let’s be clear: we supported and still support literacy reform. The legislature, on the other hand, is still holding back nearly all of the $50 million meant to help kids learn to read. Instead of funding the solutions, they’re trying to manufacture controversy,” McCarthy said. “This newly announced ‘audit’ is not a desire to truly learn, but to lay a political hit on a state elected official in the middle of a campaign.”

State testing standards have become a central issue in the April 1 election for state superintendent as Underly’s challenger, Brittany Kinser, who is backed by Republicans, has said she is running on a platform of “restoring high standards.” 

State grants audit

Lawmakers also announced that they plan to launch an audit into the administration of state grants, which they say is meant to help examine whether there is waste, fraud and abuse in the state.

According to the LAB, the audit could look into the policies an agency has for administering grants, whether agencies are compliant with state statute and administrative rules in implementing grants, the amount of grants awarded in recent years and outcomes from those awards.

The audit request comes as lawmakers are starting the process of writing the next two-year state budget. 

Wimberger and Wittke said that given the budget it is “prudent” to look at how much is being spent on grants. 

“In the last budget, the state issued more than $44 billion in grant assistance funding. Evaluating these programs for wasteful, fraudulent, or abusive spending means we can identify and cut the fat of big government, making Wisconsin’s state government more accountable for our hardworking taxpayers,” the lawmakers said. 

A public hearing on the proposed audits is scheduled for Tuesday. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Black students at Milwaukee Area Technical College have regularly received the most funds through the state's Minority Undergraduate Retention Grant program. (Photo Courtesy of MATC)

A Wisconsin Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that a grant program run by the Wisconsin Higher Education Aids Board (HEAB) to provide scholarships to students of certain minority groups is unconstitutional. 

The 2nd District Court of Appeals cited a 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision in its ruling that found the program discriminates based on race. 

A group of families, represented by the right-wing Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL), sued the HEAB in 2021 to end the minority grant program. The program, established in 1985, targets student aid at students who are Black, Hispanic, Native American and immigrants or descendants of immigrants from Laos, Vietnam or Cambodia following the end of the Vietnam War in 1975. Students receive between $250 and $2,500 in aid. The program goes to students in Wisconsin’s technical colleges, private universities and tribal colleges. The UW System operates a similar program for its students.

In the 2021-22 academic year, $819,000 was given out through the program. 

In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College (SFFA) that race-based affirmative action programs in college admissions are unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. 

“SFFA completely cut the legs out from under HEAB’s originally asserted government interest of student body diversity,” the Court of Appeals wrote. “But HEAB also does not meet its burden to show that its revised post-SFFA asserted government interest of increasing retention/graduation rates of students in the preferred groups, and relatedly reducing the disparity in retention/graduation rates between students from those groups and students from nonpreferred groups, is a compelling interest.” 

In a statement, WILL deputy counsel Dan Lennington said the ruling helps the state reach “true equality.” 

“The appellate judges agreed with WILL that the state of Wisconsin can offer aid based on need, income level, or personal hardships — but not race,” Lennington said. “Their comprehensive decision marks a turning point in the fight for true equality for both our state and country.”

After the Supreme Court ruled in SFFA, Wisconsin legislative leaders said they’d take aim at race-based scholarships like the minority grant program. While a legislative change would likely have been vetoed by Gov. Tony Evers, a Wisconsin Examiner analysis found that the money in the program largely went to Black students at Milwaukee Area Technical College.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A fatal police shooting of an unnamed person in Fond du Lac is under investigation. | Getty Images

During a stop by law enforcement officers Monday night, Feb. 24, in the Town of Fond du Lac, a Fond du Lac County Sheriff deputy shot and killed a person the deputy believed was producing a firearm.

The person’s name has not been released, nor the name of the deputies involved with the stop.

According to a press release by the Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ), on Monday evening, Fond du Lac County Sheriff’s deputies contacted someone via phone who was known to have a felony warrant. 

Law enforcement also received information from a civilian that this same person appeared to have a handgun.

A short while later, deputies located the person in the 6300 block of Cherrywood Drive, near a trailer park.  

The person refused to follow repeated commands, and one of the deputies discharged a non-lethal weapon. (The non-lethal weapon was not named in an official statement on the incident.)

The person then produced what deputies believed to be a firearm, and in response, a second deputy discharged a firearm at 6:22 p.m., striking the person.

Emergency medical specialists (EMS) were contacted, and law enforcement and EMS attempted life-saving measures.

The person was transported to a nearby hospital before being pronounced dead.

No members of law enforcement or other members of the public were injured during the incident.

The deputy involved in the shooting is on administrative assignment, per agency policy.

Law enforcement officers involved with the stop were wearing body cameras during the incident.

Additional details are being withheld during  the investigation and will be released to the public later.

The Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) Division of Criminal Investigation (DCI) is investigating the officer-involved shooting, assisted by Wisconsin State Patrol, the Fond du Lac Police Department, and the Village of North Fond du Lac Police Department.

When the DCI investigation concludes, it will turn over the investigative reports to the Fond du Lac County District Attorney’s office.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE